Essay name: Devala-smriti (critical study)
Author:
Mukund Lalji Wadekar
Affiliation: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda / Department of Sanskrit Pali and Prakrit
This essay represents an English study of the Devala-smriti鈥攁n ancient text attributed to sage Devala classified as belonging to the Dharma-Shastra branch of Indian literature which encompasses jurisprudence and religious law. This study deals with the reconstructed text of the Devala-smriti based on surviving references, emphasizing Devala鈥檚 unique viewpoints on social, religious, and philosophical aspects, particularly the Sankhya and Yoga philosophies.
Chapter 10 - Philosophical aspect of the Devalasmriti
64 (of 75)
External source: Shodhganga (Repository of Indian theses)
Download the PDF file of the original publication
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
897
which he had before him, while writing the said passages. But
the Sankhyasutra alone is the earliest extant sankhya work to which
Devala is heavily indebted.
CRITICISM:
(1) The above view of the author mainly rests upon the
presumption of the priority of the sankhyasutra to the Sankhyakarika.
This view is not generally accepted by the scholars. Most of the
Western & Indian scholars, maintain the Sankhyakarika to be the
4 -
earliest extant sankhya work. Prof.Dasgupta* believes the sankhya-
-
sutras to be "probably written sometimes after 14th century".
Prof.V.V.Sovani remarks that the Tattvasamasa is a work "older
than 7th century A.D.".
(2) The argument from parity is not a solid proof for proving
the priority or posterity of any work. The similarity may be due
to some common source. Similarity, there are also some distinct
conflicting views, which may on the same standpoint, suggest that
the other work is not the basis of it.
(3) The view of Pandita Udayavira Shastri that there is no
passage of Devala, which can be shown to have any kind of resemblance
wwwww
with the Sankhyakarika is quite baseless. The comparative statement
about Devala & the Sankhyakarika, mentioned previously (Table No.13)
can disprove this view of his.
(4) It is improper to deny any independent earlier source,
being the basis of the sutras of Devala, the sankhyasutras & the
